To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

Mt. Vernon Democratic banner (Mount Vernon, Ohio : 1853), 1860-03-27

page 1

51,- :- v. . V-J rV7 7-' fi o 'Y f,""s c5s VOLUMI XXIII. MOUNT VERNON, OHIO',:: TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1860. NUMBER 49. - - . '4' M C. ' 'I i i .'M ):v :-- : y r. ;i h ;i i l i i r i I . '. - I f J T 12 IT li. IUKPEU. Offlce in WoiiTard's Block, Third Story ' f Tk r Ci -11 v l t anco; $2,50 wUain x Monthi; f 3,00 fter tho expiration of th year. Clubs of twenty, $1,50 each. Admission of Kansas unter tnc wyanact , coNsn runoN. . . . SI'EUCII OF HON. S. A. DOUGLAS, ri'tt to ISIit. bJuWAHU AliU L1K. LKUW.VULL,, Delivered i Oie Sena e of ike. United Stales, ' February 2y, 1860. "Mr. Pbksibkn't: I trust I sh ill be pardoned for few remarks ' upon sj much uf the Senator's speech as consists in an assault On the Demo ; tratic party, aud especially, with regard to the rvansas txeoruica dih oi woicu k me responsible, author. It has. become fashionable vuow-a-days for each geutlemnn making a speech against the Democratic parly to relVr .to the -vnsas-ieDrti9Ka act as tne caose oi au me disturb n.ccs that have since ensued. They talk about the repeal of a sacred compact that htid been utnii.tturbt-d t'ut'. more than a quarter of a century,5 as if thoe who fcomplained of violated Taith bal been laitbiul to the provisions of the Missouri compromise. Sir, wherein consisted the necessity for the repeal or abrogniion of that act, except it was that the majority in the northern States refused to carry out the Missouri compromise in good faith? I s'ood Wifiing to .extend it to thePacific ocean, and abide by it forever, and the entire, 'South. 'without one exception in this body, was willing thus to abide by "itj but the fre-suil element of the northern lStats was -so strong as to defeat thnt: measure. -u iii4 f 1 1 i unmi Ida attTarfr nnaclinii onanf j'jle tiirii whu ntr oiin-i n :ii ii ot Ihi, Hhr.ij'ilinn ntthL ! . . . . - . -i a-rwere the verv men who denounced it.-ijnd dennun-.d aU ot us who were willing to noide ! - " ; hj-ii so long as it stood- upon the statute book. Sir, it was ihe deftvtt in the House of llprescn- ' tativfs of thw eiiaclment ot the bin ti extend the Missouri comprivmise to the I'aoili' ocean, after it had passed the ."natc? on my own mo tion, that -Hpetteil the controversy of 1 830, which w.- terminalad by the al.iptioii uf the measures of that year. Wecarneil those -compromise.'- measures over j the head of the Secator from New York and his present associates. We, in those me-i.itire established a greet principle, rebufeim firs dor- trine ot .intervention hv thj Oongre.-s ot the Lui-ted States to prohibit al ivery iu th Territories. H tth pivrties, iii lio2, pledged theni.-elvts to U K1. V ,Ki-rti.l..nir.n flli.l iKlId ctr.1it r.L.I .rm.'t I Cii,c-' t, t(i'-,t pi nil miu I lur.i aiuii'i ' ' T ' ' l.nt to prohibit slavery in the Terri'.ori-s by a-t f Congreec. : The -Whig ""party allirmed that pledge, and so did tlje De mot-racy." . In 18o4 e only carried oat,'.'in the ivinsas ;N iraska jct.-the. 'same principle th it hart been ctlirmed in the compromi.-e rimasure of 18o0. I repeat, thai their resistance to carrying Pnt in good faith the settlement of 1820, .-. their -.defeat of he bill for j -xtnding it to the Pacific ocean, was the sole j c a use of' the agitation ' of 'ldoi), and g4ve rise to j the necessity of -establishing the principle of non- intervutiou by Congress with slavery iu the Ter-ri'ories. . .: . Hence I am noi willine n sit here ami a.low the S-jnat(r from Xew York,. with all (tie weight ' of authority he has with . the powerfuf partyof wnicn ne is tno hao, to arraurn mean-i ina par. ty to which I bnlnmt with thV responsibility for that Agitation which rests solelv UDon him and ... . - r his associates. ' Sir, the Democratic party was willing to carry out the compromise in good fiiib llavinsr been defeated in that for the want of number., and having established the principle of non intervention in the compromise measures of 1850, in iie-i of . it, the Democratic party from that day to this has been faithfil to the new principle of adjustment. Whatever agitation has grown uut oi me queniiou since, nan oeen of-casio ed by the resistance of the party of.whieh that Senator is the head, to this great principle which has been ratified by tho American people t two presidential elections. Ifhe was willing to acquiesce in the solemn and repeated jndge-ment of that American- people to which he appeals, there would be no agitation in this country now. . ' . But, sir, the whole argument of that Senator goes far beyond the qnestion of slavery, even in the Territories. His entire argument rests oh the assumption that the nero and the white man were equal by Diviue law, and hence that all laws and constitutions and governments in violation of thj principle of negro equality are in violation ot the law of God. That is the basis up on wnicn nis spleen rests, tie quotes the Dec laration of Independence to show that the fath ers of the Revolution understood that the negro was placed on an equality with the white man by quoting the claiue, "we bold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Sir, the doctrine of that Senator and of his party is and I have had to .meet it for eight years that the Declaration of Independence intended to recognize the negro and the white man as equal under the Divine law, and hence that all the provisions of the Constitution of tbe. United States which recognizes slavery are in violation -of the Divine law. In other words, it is an afgnment against the Constitution of the United States upon the ground that it i3 contrary to the Jaw of God. -The Senator from NewYoj-k has long held that doctrine. The Senator from New York has often proclaimed to theworld that the Constitntion of the United States was in violation of the Di vine law, and that Senator will not contradict iob aiaiemeni. - i Dave an extraet from one of bis speeches now before me, in which that pro position is distinctly "pnt forth.- In a speech ade ia the State of Ohio, iu 1848,, he said: ... .'TSlaTeryls ths sin of notsomo of the Statesonly, - nt of them all; of not. one " nationality, hut of all nation. It perverted and'.corrupted the moral ssnse of manVia deppty and uotversallv, and thia pervenion. oeaame , universal kabit. llabits of taoagM oeoome nxL prlaeiplea No Americaa 6tat4ias Jet delivered luelf entirely from- these kJbits; We, in' NowOiork, .re ailcy of 'slavery "UUby.'wtUjholdmg the right of anSfrapa rrMn th J. race wo have emancipated, -i'oa, in Ohio, are gall-ty ia the saate way by" system of Alaek laws atill oiore aristoeratio and oaious. ilu wrttUaim tK Constltutloa of the UaJted States that fivs.tlave balleoumt eaual to tro fromens a basis of rer M..nmM.n . .trl It i'rttn laa TV VIOLXTIOV OF DIVIDE LAW. tBat we shall surrender the fu4i tire slave who takes'refuee at our preside from his rlntle pcrsner." ; ' Ibere ton find Usdoctrioe claarlr lata a own ihat the Constitution of the UaUed States is uin ' isolation of the Divine law" and therefore ia , rift 1st h'sirMvd- Yfln M toIf that th nlni relating to fogitive" slaves, being ia violation of w mr-v - i - " tae UiviOiaw, ta not Dinaingon mannna. Tht has teea the doctrine of ihe Senator from Ntr Yor!: for years. I bare nof heard it io the 'Senate to day for the first titsv I hare met in mjownSute, fox iht l&sk ten jears, this tame ipttcal doctrine, lb at th !eclartIoa of Independence recognized the nefrro and the white man as equal; that tb negro and white man are equals by Divine law, and that erery provision "of -oar Constitution Jtnd law which establishes inequali ty between the negro and the white man, u roid became contrary. to the law of God. . The Senator from New York says, id the ery speech from which I have quoted, that new York is yet a slave Slate. - Why? Not that she has a slave within her limits, but because the constitntion of New York does not allow a oefo to vote on an eqaal.ty with white man. Fo that reason he says New York, is still a slave State: for that reason every other State that dis criminates between the negro and the white man is a slave State, leavin? bat a very few States in the Union that are free from his objection. Yet notwithstanding the Senator i committed to to these doctrines, notwithstanding the leading men of his party are committed to them, bear- sues that they have been accused of bein? in fa vor of negro equality, and 8jg the tendency of their doctrine is the equality of the white man. lie introduces the objection, and fails to answer it. He states the proposition and dodges it, to !ave the infwrence that be does not indorse it. Sir, I desire to see these gentlemen : carry ont their principles to their logical conclusion. If they will persist in the declaration that the negro is in de the equal of the white man, and that aiiy inequality is in violation of the Divine law then let them carry it ont in their legislation by conferring on the negroes all the rights of citi zehship the same as on white men. For one, I never held to any Such doctrine. I bold that the Declaration of Independence was only refer ring to the -white man to the governing ra?e of thi3 country, who - were in conflict with Great Britnin, and had no reference to the negro race at all when it declared that all men were created equal. ' - Sir, if the signers of that declaration had understood the instrument then as the Senator from New Yoik now construes it, were they not bound on that day, at that very hour, to emancipate all their slaves? If Mr. Jefferson had meant that his negro slaves were cr?ared by the Almighty his equal, was he not bound to emancipate the slaves on the very day that he 'signed bis name to the Diclaration of IndeDendence! Yet no one ot tne signers ot tnut ne-ciaration emancipa-r ,j i,:.'-i . V' "!"'" AO. one of ite Slates on whose i i r . t j . -i . - - , - Deui'-i lne. aeciaranon. whs signeo, emaDcvpatea ,,s cUves unVl1 R,ter lh Uevolotion was over. rjvery one ot tn original colonies, every one ot the thirtf-en original States, sanctioned and legal-i,e l slavory until after: the Revolution was closed. These . iavts . show' . ''conclusively. 'that . the Dec-laratii.m of Independence was" neverintended to bear the. construction '-plated npon "it by the Senator from New York, and by that enormous tribe of lecturers that go through the country delivering lectures in couutrj-school bouses and base-menH of churches to --abolitionists, in order to j ti-afh the children I hat the Almiuhtr' had put bis oi cumif luiiRuun upon any luequaJity oe-t:ecn t lie white in'n and negro. Mr, IVoaiJeiit, 1 am free to say here what I hayu said over and ovpr Htin at home that, in .my opinion.' this Government was made by tuie men for the beuefit of white men and their pi-i.-;ierity forever;" n'd should be ndia in istered by whife men, anrt ;v non other whatsoever. Mr DOOLI TTLK. I will Seu.iior, then, why not give while wen? ask the honorable the Territories to 5dr. DOUGLAS. Mr.: President, I am in fa- vor.of throwing the Territurifs open to "all the white men. and all the iiejrrivs, too, that choose to gt), and then allow the white men to govern the Territory. I would not let' one of the ne-gnoe. tree or slave, cither' vote or hold office anywhere, whero I had 'thn right, under the Con- f utitution. to prevent U. 1 am in tavor of each Stale ana each, territory ot this buioo taking care of its own negroes, free or slave. If they want slavery, let them have .it;' if they desira to prohibit slavery, let them do it; it is their business, not mine. . ""e in Illinois tried slavery while we were a Territory, and found it was not profitable; and hence we turned philanthropists and .abolished it, just as onr British friends ucross the ocean did. They established slavery in all their colonies, and when they fiund they could not make any more money out of it abolished it. I hold that the question of slaverr is one of political economy, governed by tbe laws of climate, soil, productions, and self-interest, and not by mere statutory provision, I repudi ate the doctrine, that because free institutions may 'be best in one climate, they are, necessarily, the best everywhere; or that because slavery may be indispensable in one locality, therefore it is desirable everywhere. I hold that a wise states man will always adapt his legislation to the wants, interests, condition, and necessities of the people to be governed by it. One people will bear different institutions from another. One climate demands different institutions from another. - I repeat, then, what I have ol'ien had occasion to say, that I do not think uniformity is either possible or desirable. I wish to see no two States precisely alike in their domestic institutions in this Union. Our system rests on the supposition that each State has something in her condition or climate, or her circumstances, requiring laws and institutions diEferent from every other State of the Union. , Hence I answer the question of the Senator from Wisconsin, that I am willing that a Territory settled by white men shall have negroes, free or slave, just as the white men shall determine, but not as the negro shall prescribe. The Seaator from New York has coined a new definition of the States of . the Union. Labor States and Capital States. The capital States, I believe, are the slaveholding States, the labor States are the non-slaveholding States. It has taken that - Senator a good many years to coin that phrase and bring it into use. I hare heard him discuss these favorite theories of his for the last ten years, I think, and I never heard of capital States and labor States before. It strikes me that something has recently occurred up in New England that makes t politic to get up a question Detween capital ana laoor, ana take tho sida of the numbers against the few. We nave seen some accounts in the newspapers of combinations and strikes among the journeymen shoemakers in the towns there, labor gainst capital. The Senator has a "tew word ready coined to suit their case, and make the laborers believe last fie is oa toe side ot tne most num erous class of roters. . " What produced that strike among the jorney men shoemakers?--Why are the mechanics of New England, the laborers aod the employees, now reduced to the sUrration poiaf? Simply because by jour treason, by your sectional agita tion, yon bare created a strife between the iNorth aod the South, bare driven 'way rear southern customers, and thus depnre the laborers ff the means ot sapporr. 1 nis is tbo fruit of yoni lie Sublicao.dogma&v - It is another step, following ohn Browo, of the 'irrepressible ; cooflrcU" Therefote, we now get this new coinage of "la oor Otatea h ia mi thm . aT thm art; lSatar,) Md oapitar be ii agaiost . r " . .TL "" naes. l La.ogbter.1 imrnc inoseaaoaaa,, . wiU understin'ihi. bawaesa. ; They know whr it i. thai they do not getyaan ;ord,r 4s ,tejj dicj ;f montba go. J ! not .coafioed to (tlje shoemakers; it rewiuci wovuihiu snpp ana ererr factory au taa targe . jaoonng..eUblishmBt. rit. .Norttt feel the preanca pTodnced by thedoctrina of taa 'trrepressiDie conflict," This oaw1 coin aga oi words wiil not aara them from tha jnst respousibility that follows the doctrines they hare been inculcating. -If the bad abandoned the doctrine of the "irrepressible conflict," and proclaimed the true doctrine of the Constitution that each State is entirely free to do just as it pleases, hare slavery as lone; as it chooses, and abolish it when It wishes) there would be no conflict; the northern and southern States aroald be brethren; there would be fraternity between'as, and y onr shoemakers would not strike for higher prices. - ' - ' ' ' ' - ' ' - Mr. CLARK. Will the Senator pardon me for interrupting him a moment? Mr. DOUGLAS. I will not gire war for a speech;' I will for a suggestion." ; Mr. CLARK I desire simply to make one ingle suggestion in regard to what the Senator from Illinois said in reference to the condition of the laboring - classes in the factories. I come from a city where there are three thousand opera- tirea, and there never was a time when they were more contented and better paid in the factories than now, and when their easiness was better than at this present lime, r . Mr. DOUGLAS. I was speaking of the scar city of labor growing np In out northern raanu factoring towns, as a legitimate and natural eon-sequence of the diminution of the demand for the manufactured articles; and then the question is, what cause has reduced this demand, except the "irrepressible conflict" that 'has turned the southern trade away from northern cities into Southern towns and soathern cities! Sir, the feeling among the masses of the South we find typified in tbe dress of tbe oenatot from Virginia, Mr, Mason:) they are determined to wear the homespun of their own productions rather than trade with tbe North. That is the feeling which has produced this state of distress in our manu facturing towns. : - :"; ,.;' - The Senator from Ne w York has also referred to the'recent action of the people of Ne w Mexi co, in establishing a code for the protection of property in slaves,, and he. congratulates the country upon the final success of the advocates f free institutions in Kansas, tie could not fail, however, to eay, in order t3 preserve what he thought was a striking, antithesis, that popn- ar sovereignty in Kansas meant State sovereign ty in Missouri. No, sir; popular sovereignty iri Kansas was stricken down by unholy combina tion in New England to ship men to Kansss rowdies and vagabonds with the Bible in one and and Sharp s rifle in the other, to shoot down the friends of self-government. Popular sovereignty in Kansi 8 was Stricken down by the combi ations in tbe northern. States to carryelections nder pretence of emigrant aid societies. In retaliation, Missouri formed aid societies too; and he, following your example, sent men into Kan sas and then occurred tne conflict. iNow, you throw the blame' upon Missouri merely because she followed your example, and attempted to resist its consequences. I 'condemn b th; but I condemn a thousand fold more those that set the example and struck the first blow, than those who thought they would act upon the principle of lighting the devil: with his own weapons, and re sorted to the same means that you hademployed,- . -:-. " -" ".v- - --But, Sir, notwithstanding the efforts of the enigrant ail societies, the people of Kanasas have had their own way, and tbe people ot New Mexico have had. their own way. Kansas has adopted! free State; New Mexico has established a slare Territory, I am content with both. If the people of New Mexico want slavery, let them have i; and I never will rote to repeal thir slave code. If Kansas does not want slavery, I will not help anybody to force it on her. Let each 4o as it pleases. When Kansas comes to tbe conclusion that slavery will suit her, and promote her interest better than the prohibition, let her pass her own slave code; I will not pass it for her. Whenever New Mexico gets tired of her code, she must repeal it for herself; I will not repeal it for her. 'Non intervention by Congress with slavery in" the Territories is the platform on which I stand. Bat I want to know why will not the Senator from New York carry oat his principles to their logical conclusions? Why is there not a man in that whole party, in this body or the Douse of Repreaentatives, ' bold enough to redeem the pledges which that parly has made to the country. I believe you said, in your Philadelphia platform, that Congress had sovereign power over the Ter- itories for their government, and that it was the uty ot Congress to prohibit, in all the territo ries, thoae twin relics of barbarism, slavery and polygamy. Why do you not cany out your pledges? .Why do you not introduce your bill? be Senator from Mew x org says they bare no new measures to originate; no new movement to make; no -new bill to bring forward. Then what confidence shall , the American people repose in jour faith and sincerity, when baring the power in one House, you do not bricg for ward a bill to carry out your principles? The fact is, these principles are arowed to get rotes n the North, bat not to be carried into effect by acts of Congress. You are afraid of hurting your party if you "bring in yonr bill to repeal the slave code of New Mexico; afraid of driving off the conservative men; you think it is wise to wait until after the election, I should be glad to hare confidence enough in the sincerity of the other ide of the Chamber to suppose that they had umcient ccurage to bring forward a law to carry out their principles to their logical conclusions. find nothing of that. 1 bey wish to aitate, to excite the people of the North against the South to get votes for tbe Presidential election; but they shrink from carrying out their measures lest they might throw off some conserratire roters who do not like the Democratic party. But, sir, if the Senator from New York, in the event that he is made President, intends to carry out his principles to their logical conclusions,. let us see where they will lead him. In the same speech that I read from a few minutes ago, find the following. Addressing tne people of Ohio, he said: " You blush not at these things, because they have become as familiar at household words; and jeur pretended Free-Soil alltos claim peculiar merit for maintaining the miscalled guarantees of slavery, whith they find in the national compact. Does not all this prove that tho Whig party have Kept xrp with the spirit of the age ; that it is as true and faithful to human freedom as the Inert conscience of the American people will permit it to he ? What then, you say, can nothing be done for freedom, because the public conscience remains inert 7 Yes, much can be done, everything can he done.; Slavery can be limited to ttt present bounllt. That is the first thing that can be done sla very can be limited to "its present bounds. What else? -' " " ' . ; ' - -' . " can be ameliorated.- It can and must be aholiahedf and you and I can and must do U.n There you God are two propositions; first, sla-' rery was to be limited to the States iowhkh it was then situated, it did not teen exist in any Territory. Slavery was confined to the States. Tbe first proposition was that slarery must be re stricted and conhned to those States. Ihe sec ond was that he, tu Ntw Yorker, and they, the people of Ohio, mast and would abolish it; that is to say aDoiisn it in tne states. ;- j. ney couia abolisbr it o where else.-' Erery appeal they make to northern prejudice - and -paiaion, is against the institution of elarery' everywhere, and tbef would eotoe able to retain their aboli tion allies, the rank and file, unless they held oat the hope that it was the mission of the Re-Dabiicaa partr, if successful, 'to abolish slaverr in the States as well as in the Territories of the Union. . ..jsm.-s-i- .,. t,f. I And again in the tana ipetch, the Senator from New York a& vised the people to disregard con stitntiooal Obligations in these words: i . Bat we mast begiii deeper and lower than the composition and eombmaiio of faetioas or oarties. wherein the strength and reeurtty of slavery lie. You answer taa is iie in toe Lonttitution of the United BUte ana one constitutions and laws of elarebolding Mates. Jo at all. Ik ia la the erro neous sentiment of tfe American people. Coostitu. tions and laws can ne more rise above the rirtoe of the people thaa .tne limpid stream can climb above its Dative spring- IrfeaJcate the love of freedom and the equal right of ma under tie paternal roof to U tna teg are rmvgiu. t ute ecJtoot and in the chHrcket: reform yonr Own code extend a cor welcome to ke fugitive mho lave kie wenm limbe at yonr door, and defend him a you mould vcmr vaternal goae; evrreci yomr w mur, uat emvtiy i a wnetitu txonttl guarantee vraicM may not be reieaeeiL and ovakt . . r i- . 1 .tf . . I know they tell s that all ihia is to bt lone according to the Coastitation j they would not violate the Constitution except so far as the Con stitution violate the law of (Jod that is alj and they are to be the judges of how Urthe",Con stitution does violate the law of God. - TbeV aar that every clause of the Constitution that recog- - : '- - - ? , . . mzes property iu eiavra, is in violation ot the Divine law, and hence should not be obeyed; and with. that interpretation of the Constitution, they turn "to the South ana Say, "We will give you all your righu"junder the Constitution as we explain it!" . f-' " "'" -".- -.-,-.'- Then the Senator devoted ahoat'a third of his speech to a very beautiful homily on tbe glories of our Union. All that he has said, all thit any other man has ever said, all thatj the most eloquent tongne "can ever otter, in behalf of the blessings and the advantages of. this glorious UnioB, I fully endors. But still, sir, I am prepared to say, that the Union is glorioas only when the Constitution is preserved ioviolate. He eulogized the Union. ; I, too, am for the Union ; I indorse the eulogies; but still, what is the Union worth, unless the Constitution is preserved and maintained inviolate, in all its provisions? Sir, I have no faith in the Union-loving senti-timents of those who will pot carry out the Constitution in good faith, as. our fathers made it. Professions of fidelity to the Union will be taken for naught, unless they are accompanied by obedience to the Constitution upon which the Union rests. I have a right to insist that the Constitution shall be maintained inviolate in all its parts, not only that which suits the temper of the North, but every claase of that Constitution, whether you like it or dislike it. Your oath to 8apo:t the Constitution binds you to every line, word, and syllable of the instrument. You have no right to say thatany givea clause is in vio lation of the Divine law, and that, therefore, you will not observe it. The man who disobeys any one clause, on the pretext that it violates the Divine law, or on any other pretext, violates his oath of office. ' - But, sir, what a commentary is this pretext that the Constitution is a riolation of the Divine la w4 upon those revolutionary, fathers whose eulogies we have heard here to day. Did the fram-ers of that instrument make a Constitution in violation of the law of. God? If so, how do yonr consciences allow you to take the oath of office? II the Senator from New York still holds to his declaration that the clar - in the Constitution laliw tn fticritivfi aluviw ia A 1 - r Divine law, how dare w, es-n honeae marrrt an oath to support the instrument? Did he un derstand that be was defying the authority of Heaven when he took the oath to support thst instrument? " : Thus, we see, the radical difference between the Republican party and the Democratic party, is this: we stand by the Constitution as our fathers made it, and by the decisions of the constituted authorities as they are pronounced in obedi-., ence to the Constitution. They repudiate the instrument, substitute their own will for that of the constituted authorities, annul such provisions as theirfanaticism, or prejudice, or policy, may de: Clare to be in violation ofGod's. law, and then say, t'We will protect all your rights under the Constitution as expounded by ourselve.; but not as expounded by the tribunal created for that purpose." Mr, PresiJent, I shall not occupy further time in the discussion of this qui stion to-night. I did not intend to utter a word; and I should not have uttered a word upon the subject, if the Senator from New York had not made a broad arraignment of the Democratic party, and especially of that portion of the action of the party for which I was most immediately responsible. Every body knows that I brought forward and helped to can ry ihrough the Kansas-Nebraska act, and that I was active in support of the compromise meas ares of 1850. I have heard bad faith attached to the Democratic party for that act too long to ne willing to remain silent and seem to sanction it even by tacit acquiescence. Mr. Traraball having replied to Mr. Donglas, he responded as follows: - . I have but a few words to say, in reply to my colleague; and first on the question'whetber Illi nois was a slave Territory or not; and whether we ever had slavery iu the State. I dislike tech nical denial, conveying an idea contrary to the fact. My colleagne well knows, and io do I, that practically, we had slaves there while a Territory, and after we became a' State. I have seen him dance to the music of a negro slave In Illi nois many a time, and I hare danced to the same music myself.: (Laughter.) We have both had the same negro servants to black ear boots and wait upon as, and they wer held as slaves. We know, therefore, that slavery did exist in the State in fact, and slavery did exist in the Terri tory in faet; and his denial relates exclusively to the question whether slarery was legal. Wheth er legal or not, it existed in fact. The master exercised his dominion over the alare, and those negroes were held as shires until 1847, when we established the new constitntion. There are gen tlemen around me here, who know the fact gen tlemen who were nursed by slaves in Illinois. Mo man familiar with the history of Illinois will deny the fact. The quibble is, that the territorial laws authorizing the introduction of slaves were roid because the ordinance of 1787 said slavery was prohibited. : Notwithstanding that ordinance.tbe old French inhabitants, who had slaves before the ordinance, paid no attention to it, and held slaves still. Slaves were held there all the time that Illinois was a Territory; an l after it became a State they were beldHHl they all died out, and their children became emancipated nnder the constitution. It is a fact; we all know it. That gentleman has seen many ot those old French slave, who were held in defiance of the ordinance. Whether they were lawfully held or not, the territorial authorities aslaioed the rights of the master. Not only were slaves held by the French before the ordinance, but the Territorial Legislature' passed a ibw iu luunwnuv vj tuia eueci: any citizen migai ! go to Keatacky, of any other State or Territory, j where slaves were held, and bring slaves into the Territory of Illinois, take them to a county court and in open court enter into an indenture by which the slave and his posterity were to serve bint for binety-nine years; and In the event that the slave -efased to enter into the Indenture, tbe master should have il certain- time In . take Lim out of 4he Territory and eell binw -The Senator now aaya thatlaw'was not valid. Valid or not, It was executed; slaves were introdaced.and they Vere-.nser1j'tbey -wereworkedj and ' they died slaves. Tnat ia tha fct. I bave had handed to tne a ' book show lag the nu mber of slaves in Illinois at the tallcof the varions censuses, by which it appears that; when the censns 'Of -1810 . waa taken, there were ia Illinois 163 tlavei; in 1820, 917; in IS30, 747; and in 1840, 331. Io 1850 there were noDe, for the reason that, in 1847, we adopted a new constitntion that prohibited slavery entirely, and by that time they had nearly all died. . The census shows that atone time there were as many as nine hundred slaves, and at all times the dominion of the master was maintained. ' The fact is, that the people of the Territory f Illinois, when it was a Territory, were almost all from the southern States, particularly from Kentucky and Tennessee.. The southern end of the State was the only part at firat settled that patt called Egypt because it is the land of letters of plenty. Civilization aod learning all originated in Egypt. The northern part of the State, where the political friends of my colleague now preponderate, was thenin"",the possession of the Indians, and so were northern Indiana and north ern Ohio; and a Yankee could not get to Illinois at all, uo less he passed down through Virginia and over into Tennessee and through Kentucky. The consequence was, thatninety-nine oat of a hundred of tbe settlers were from the slave States. Tbey carried the old family servants with them, and kept them. They were told '"Here is an or dinance of Congress passed against your holding them. r i hey said, V hat has.: Congress to do with our domestic institutions; Congress had bet ter mind its own business, and let us alone; we know what we want better than Congrese: and hence they passed tbi3 law to bring them in and make them indentured. Under that, they estab lished slavery and held slaves as long as they wanted them. W hen they assembled to make the constitution of Illinois, in 1818, for admission into the union, nearly every delegate to the con vention brought his regro along with him to black his boots, play the fiddle, wait upon him, and take care of his room. They had a iollr time there; they were dancing people, frolicsome people, people who enjoyed life; they had the old French habits. Slaves were just as thick there as blackberries. But they said . "Experience prores that it is not going to be profitable in this climate." There were no scruples about it. Every one of them was nursed by it. His mother and his father held slaves. They had no scruples about its being right, but tbey said, "We cannot make any money by it and as our State runs way of north up to those eternal snows, perhaps we shall gain population faster if we stop slavery and invite in the northern population;" and, as a matter of political policy, State policy, they prohibited slavery themeelvea. How did they prohibit it? Not by emancipating, setting at liberty, the slaves then in the State, for I believe that has never been done by any legislative body in America, and I doubt whether any one will ever arrogate to itself the right to divest property already there; but thpy provided that all slaves then in the State should remain slaves for life; that all indentured persous should fulfill the terms of their indentures. Ninety-nine years was abou t long enough. I reckon, for grown persons at least. All persons of slave parents, after a certain time, were to beree at a certain age. and all born after a certain other period, trere to b free at their birth. It was a gradual system of emancipation. Ilence, I now repeat, that so long as the ordinance of 187, passed by Congress, said Illinois should not .lave slavery, she did have it; "d the very first day that our people arrived at f that'condition that thefconld do as iheffieuJieT to wit, when they became a State, they adopted a system of gradual emancipation ; but still slarery "continued in the State, as the census of of 1820, the census of 1830, and the census of 1840, show, un'il the new constitution of 1847, when nearly all those old slares had died out, and probably there were not. a half dozf n alive. That was the way slavery was introduced and expired n Illinois; Whatever quibbles there maj be about legal construction, legal right, these are the facts. Look into the territorial legislation, and yon will find as rigorous a code for the protection of slave property as in any State a code prescribing the control of the master, providing that if a negro slave should leave his master's farm with out leave, or in the night time, he should be punished by so many stripes, and if he committed such an offence he should receive so many stripes and so on; as rigorous a code as ever existed in any southern State of this Union, Not only that, but after the Stste came -into the Union, the State of Illinois reenacted that code, and continued it op to the time that slavery died out under the operation of the State constitution. I dislike, sir, to have a controversy with ray colleague about historical facts. I suppose the Senate of the United States has no particular interest in the early history of Illinois, but it has become obligatory on'me to vindicate my statement to that extent. Now, sir. a word about the repeal of the Mis souri Compromise. I have had occasion to refer to that before in the Senate, and I am sorry to have to refer to it again. - My colleague arraigns me av chairman of the Committee on Territories against myself as a. member of the Senate in 1854, upon the Nebraska bill. - He says that, as chairman of the committee, I reported that we did not see proper to depart from the example of 1850 ; that as the Mexican laws were cot then repealed in terms, we did not propose in terms to repeal the Mis. soon restriction, but there the Senator stops, and there theessanse of the report begins but, the report added, this committee propose to carry out the principles embodied in the compromise measures of 1850 in precise language, and then we go on to state what those principles were; and one was, that the people of a Territory should settle the question of slavery -for them-selves, and we report a bill giving them that power. - But in as much as the power to introduce slavery, notwithstanding the Mexican laws,, was conferred on the Territorial Legislatures nnder tbe compromise measures of 1850, the right to introduce it into Kansas, notwithstanding the Mis souri restriction, was also proposed to be confer red without expressly repealing the restriction. The legal effect was precisely the same. Afterwards some gentlemen said they would rather have the legal effect expressed in plain language. I said, "if yon want a repealing act, bare its it does not alter the legal effect." I said so at the time, as the debates show ; and hence I put in the express provision. that .the Missouri act was. thereby repealed. It did not change the legal effect of the bill; but that variation of language has been the staple of a great many stomp speeches, a great many miserable quibbles of county court lawyers, a great many attempts to prove inconsistency by small politicians in the country. " Be it so. The people understand that thine. - The Object I had in view was to allow 1 the people to do as they, pleased. The Erst bill accomplished that; the amendment accomplished it. Whether that was the object of others or not, i) another question. That was my object. The two bills in my opinion bad the same legal effect; but I said if any one doubts it, I will make it plain.' .Some1 said ""we " doubt 1 whether that gtves,the'rlght.' Then I made it plain and brought it in , expresssr terms, and be calls it a change of policy. Ht colleague is welcome to make the most out of that. I bare had that ar-raignmeot orer again.' ' -- The Senator has some doubt" aar to whether I am in good standing in riy own part; whether I am a good' represeutatire" of -northwestern Democracy" I hare nclbin j to aay-aboat IkaL I will allow the people to speak - in -thehf cxnven-tionsoo thai sobject. Whether I 'represent the Democracy of IUirois or not, I aball not say. - The people nnderstand all that. . I can only say that I have been in the Democratic party all my life, and I know what oar Democrats mean. My colleague indorsed and approved the compromise measures of 1850. He was a Democrat a few years ago. 'Even in 185G, be declared, I believe, that he could not vote for me, if nominated, bat he would vote for Mr. .Buchanan; but, after tbe nomination, be did net like tbe platform, and he went over. I have no objection to that; it is all right enough, i Lever intended to taunt him with inconsistency; but I do not think he is as safe and as authoritative en expounder of the Kepublican party as the Senator from New York. The Senator from New York rays that a State that does not allow a negro to vote on an equal, ity with a while man is a slave State. I read his speech here to day. I suppose the Senator from New York is a pretty good Republican. I thought he epoee with some authority for his party. Idid not suppose those neophytes who had just come into the party were going to unset tie and unhorse the leader and embodiment of the party so quickly, and prescribe a platform that would rnle out the Senator from New York. I mast be permitted, therefore, to take the authority of the leaders of the party in -preference to those who are kept in the rank and file until they have served an apprenticeship. (Laughter.) The Senator from N. York says it is slavery not to allow the negro to vote. , Well sir, I hold that that is political slavery. If you disfranchise a man, you make him a political slave. Deprive a white man of a voice in his government, and politically he is a slave. Hence the inequality you create is slavery to that extent. My colleague will not allow a negro to vote. He lives too far south in Illinois for that, decidedly. He has to expound tbe creed down in Egypt. They have other expositions up north. . The creed is pretty black in the north end of the State ; a-bout the centre it is a pretty good mulatto, and it is almost white when you get down into Egypt. It assumes paler shades as you go south. The Democrats of Illinois have one creed, and we can proclaim it everywhere alike. The Senator, my colleague, complains that I represent his party to be in favor of nogro equality. No such thing, says he; I tell my colleague to his teeth it is not so." There is something very fearful in the manner in which he said itl Senators know that he is a dangerous man who eays things to a man's teeth, and I shall be very cautious how I reply. But- te eays he does hold that by the law of God the negro and the white man are created equal; that is, be savs, in a state of nature: and, therefore, he says be indorses that claase of tbe Declaration - of Independence as including the negro as well as the white man. I do not think I mistake my colleagne. He thinks that claase of the Declaration of Independence includes tbe negro as well as the white man. He declares, therefore, that the negro and the white man were created equal. What does that Declaration also eay: "We hold these truths to be self-evident; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." If the negro and the white man are created (jual, and that equality is an tnoZtenaWe right, by what authority is my colleague and his party going to deprive the negro of that inalienable right which be got directly from Godl He says the Republican party is not in favor of aeeavdtag tn4togrartM.aaliensble right that he received directly from his Maker. Oh, no; he tells me to my teeth that they are not io favor of that; tbey will not obey tbe laws of God at all. Their creed i3 to take away inalienable rights. Well I have found that out before, aod that is just the reason I complain of them, that they are for taking away inalienable rights. . If they will cling to the doctrine that the Declaration of Independence conferred certain inalienable rights, among which, we are told, is e-quality between the white man and the negro, they are bound to make tbe human laws they establish conform to those God-given rights which are inalienable. If they believe the first proposition, as honest men,, they are bound to carry the principle to its logical conclusion, and give tbe negro his equality and voice in tbe Government; let him vote at elections, hold ofSce, serve on juries, make him J udge, Governor, ('Senator.') No, they cannot make him" a Senator, because the Supreme Court has decided that he is not a citizen. The Dred Scott decision is in the way. Perhaps that is the reason of. the objection to the Dred Scott decision, that a negro cannot be a Senator. I say, if you hold that the Almighty created the negro the equal of tbe white man, and that equality be an inalienable right you are bound to confer the elective franchise and every other privilege of political equality on the negro. The Senator from New York stands op to it like a man. His logic drove him there, a'jd he bad the honesty to avow the cohseqnence of his own doctrine. That is to say, he -did it before the Harper's Ferrrr raid. He did not say it quite as plainly to-day; for. I will do ihe Senator from New York the justice to say, that in his speech to-day, I think be made the most successful effort, considered as an attempt to conceal what he meant, (Laughter.) He dealt in vague gen eralities; be dealt in disclaimers and general denials; and he covered it all np with a verbiage that would allow anybody to infer just what he pleased, but not to commit the Senator to anything; and to letthe country know that there was no danger from the success of the Republican party; that they did not mean any harm; that if men, believing in the truth of their doctrines, did go and commit invasions, m aiders, robberies, and treason, alt they had to do was to disavow the men who were fools enaugh to believe fbem, and they are not responsible for the consequences of their own action! Now, Mr. President, I wish ray colleague was equally as frink as the Senator from New York. That Senator is in favor of the equality of the negro with the white . man, or else he would not ear that the Almighty guarantied to them an in- auenaoie rignt oi equality,, my coueagae aare not deny the inalienable rights of tbe negro, for if he did, the. Abolitionists would quit him. He dare not avow it, lest the old line Whigs should quit him ; hence he is riding double on this ques tion. 1 nave no desire to conceal my opinions ; and I repeat that I do not believe the negro race is any part oi tne governing element in mis country, except as an element of representation - --i -, .t n in tne manner expressly provioeu in tne vonsiitn- tion. This is a wnite man s government, made b white men for the benefit of white men, to be administered by white men and nobody else j and I should regret tec day that we ever allowed the negroes to hare a hand in its administration. Not that the negro is not entitled to any privile ges at all ; on the contrary, I hold that humani ty requires us to allow the unfortunate negro to enjoy all the rights and privileges that he may seieiy exercise consistent, wud tne gooa oi society. We may, with safety, give them some privileges in Illinois that would not be safe in Mississippi ; because we have but few, while that State has many. We will take care of our negroes, if Mississippi will take care of hers. Each has a right to decide for itself what shall be the relation of the negro to the white man withia .its own Emits, and no ether State has a right to interfere with its determination. . . On that principle there is ni irreprsssroIe eca fiict; there is no eoofiict at alL If we wilt jast take care of oar own negroes, and tniod our own bnsinesa, we shall gel along very well j and we ask oar southern friends to do the same, and tbey seem pretty well disposed to do :U Therefore, I am ia favor of just firing broadside into oar Republican friends over there, who widlkee? interfernij with other people's basinets. That is the complaint I have of them. They kee? holding np the negro for bo te worship, and when they Ret tbe power, they will not give Lin the rights they claim for him ; they will not gire him bis inalienable rights. New York Las set given the .negro those inalienable lights ef suffrage yet. The Senator from New York represents a slave State, according to his own speech; because New York does not allow the negro vote on en equality with a white mi. It is true in New York, they do allow a negro to vote, if he owns 1250 worth of property, bet not without. Tbey suppose $250 joal compensates for the difference between a rich negro and a poor white man. ' Laughter. They allow the rich negro to rote, and do not allow tbe poor one; and the Senator from New York thinks that is a system of slavery. It may be; let New York decide that, it is her business. I do not want to inter? fere with it. Jast let us atone. We do not wans negro suffrage.. We say "non-interference hands off." If yon like the association of the negroes at the polls, that is yonr business; if yoa . . i . i. i , if ' . i . . . come here, give offices to them, if yon choose if you want them for magistrates, that is your business; but yoa mast not send them keref because we do not allow anybody but citizens la bold seats on. this floor; and,-thank God, the Dred Scott case has decided that a negro is no! a citizen. Now, Mr. President, I hope I shall not be com pelled to engage further in the discussion, and I apologize for the fact that I have occupied so mnch time. i . net. - PEOSPEEITY. AND GOLD AHEAD HEW ELDORADO. ,'" Farsuxgtoj?, Mo., March 10th, I860. Fbiexd Harper The good people in and about Fredericktown, Madison County, Mo., are waking np to their interest, and looking out, around, beyond, and a new, bright and encouraging prospect looms in the close and immediate future before them. Gold an immense load of gold, is supposed to cap 'the pine bills around this quiet little town. Copper, lead, co Dalr, platinum, ana otner ncn ana valoaDie mines are being discovered and opened all around the town and vicinity. . The little, usually quiet town is alive with portentous whispers and prey phetic visions of its own future greataeef A new " Birmingham in America,' a second San Francisco and Sacramento, must and will, perhaps, spring np in S.E. Missouri. It is eatd Dr. Koch of St. Louis has been there and selected a perfect cabinet of minerals from the rich mines in the neighborhood. He regards the certainty of gold beyond any possible question of doubt. Professor Weiss, of St. Louis, has been there and returned with a quantity of ore for the purpose cf experimenting, and preparing ' farnaces, to be erected at the mines ss soon as ?tbey can be COnstf acted, and other arrangements matured. The Dr. thinks they can net $350 to $400 per 100 pounds of ore. If this estimate should ultimately prove correct, there is gold enough in that mine to realize a fortune for every man, woman and child ia Missouri. They are also preparing machinery and opening a Coppermine within half a wile of the town. It is supposed to be a very rich vein. The whole country, no doubt, is dotted thickly with the richest deposits on the globe, is aar nnantitr. and of emrr kind. Th wh.-vla country mast ere long be filled with furnaces", manufactories and work -shops, when those God"-given resources shall be developed by indostru n a T a VvV a tet tx r tn iVinVinw mm tm mm uu3 ia uvt tu iu feci iigcukf vuiu avi ug in mn Later and more satisfactory accounts of the gold mines will be found in the following extract from the Arcadia Prospect, in answer to unmerr with platinum, in a species of fjnite or trap, consisting of crystals of hornblende and quarts, in some specimens distinct and well defined, and in others so small and intimately mingled as) to give the rock the appearance of a homoge neous mass. Its color is from dark olive greets to iron black, owing to the predominance of the dark hornblende : and it is very bard, although; it KMinAi hritf?A hw riatinir ftn.t i f finn mM9 . - - j -OJ - . pulverized. In some specimens the particles of precious metals are so finely disseminated as ia be invisible to the naked eye, while in others they may be distinctly seen and appear of a light yellow color, not much resembling that of f oil, and approaching nearest to that of iron pyriteU The gold bearing rock consists of an immense dyke,whicb has been traced for some 6 miles, and appears at a point several miles distant from the locality first opened, to be as rich in precioaS metal as any where else. The width: of the dyke? or rem tae not been ascertained, but it ie known to be over sixty feet, and probably amounts toy several hundred. In depth, it is undoubtedly ia' exhaustible and will probably improve i a richness in going down in it." The first discovery of golJ and platinum was made near tne "ivoar-ing Mountain" in township thirty-two, range six, Madison County. f , " ibe quanuty ot ore is supposed to equal tt masses of iron ore composing the celebrated" Pilot Knob and Iron Mountain. Various sacs- pies of the ore have been subjected to analysis, and been found to contain from one to two as J a half per cent, of alloyed gold and platinum, of the value of at least $15 per ounce : that is, the valoe "of tbe metals in the ore is from f 3,0?3 to $10,000 per ton.' 1 presume the foregoic is in the main true, as a gentleman told me yesterday, be saw the Coa cruahiag mill goinr down on the Iron Mountain Rail Road. It is reported that gold has been found in Green eoonty, ; tt,a St Francois conntr. but these 4B)UA SMey m eJ ej reports need confirmation.--Small quantities of the precious metals, ha this and adjoining conn lij have been fond heretofore. And tradition says that both gold and silver exist ia the spars of the Ozark Moantalns along the St. Franooia. RJrer. No doubt, as the people are aroused and the prospective spirit is up to Us loll tiht, c&tr discoveries wiU ere long be mads. I mast w'-x no ordinary feelings of satisfaction coEratuIatar South East Missouri on the bright procTecU epreadlo out far and wkla before be?, and niy ber resources develep as it alvanees. Do your doty, fellow ciuzens. Gal h3 lef pea you. help yoarlTS, and when yoaaJlbaTS oads a fortune, give tba baUac t. p-vr , . J. S. umtoci

51,- :- v. . V-J rV7 7-' fi o 'Y f,""s c5s VOLUMI XXIII. MOUNT VERNON, OHIO',:: TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1860. NUMBER 49. - - . '4' M C. ' 'I i i .'M ):v :-- : y r. ;i h ;i i l i i r i I . '. - I f J T 12 IT li. IUKPEU. Offlce in WoiiTard's Block, Third Story ' f Tk r Ci -11 v l t anco; $2,50 wUain x Monthi; f 3,00 fter tho expiration of th year. Clubs of twenty, $1,50 each. Admission of Kansas unter tnc wyanact , coNsn runoN. . . . SI'EUCII OF HON. S. A. DOUGLAS, ri'tt to ISIit. bJuWAHU AliU L1K. LKUW.VULL,, Delivered i Oie Sena e of ike. United Stales, ' February 2y, 1860. "Mr. Pbksibkn't: I trust I sh ill be pardoned for few remarks ' upon sj much uf the Senator's speech as consists in an assault On the Demo ; tratic party, aud especially, with regard to the rvansas txeoruica dih oi woicu k me responsible, author. It has. become fashionable vuow-a-days for each geutlemnn making a speech against the Democratic parly to relVr .to the -vnsas-ieDrti9Ka act as tne caose oi au me disturb n.ccs that have since ensued. They talk about the repeal of a sacred compact that htid been utnii.tturbt-d t'ut'. more than a quarter of a century,5 as if thoe who fcomplained of violated Taith bal been laitbiul to the provisions of the Missouri compromise. Sir, wherein consisted the necessity for the repeal or abrogniion of that act, except it was that the majority in the northern States refused to carry out the Missouri compromise in good faith? I s'ood Wifiing to .extend it to thePacific ocean, and abide by it forever, and the entire, 'South. 'without one exception in this body, was willing thus to abide by "itj but the fre-suil element of the northern lStats was -so strong as to defeat thnt: measure. -u iii4 f 1 1 i unmi Ida attTarfr nnaclinii onanf j'jle tiirii whu ntr oiin-i n :ii ii ot Ihi, Hhr.ij'ilinn ntthL ! . . . . - . -i a-rwere the verv men who denounced it.-ijnd dennun-.d aU ot us who were willing to noide ! - " ; hj-ii so long as it stood- upon the statute book. Sir, it was ihe deftvtt in the House of llprescn- ' tativfs of thw eiiaclment ot the bin ti extend the Missouri comprivmise to the I'aoili' ocean, after it had passed the ."natc? on my own mo tion, that -Hpetteil the controversy of 1 830, which w.- terminalad by the al.iptioii uf the measures of that year. Wecarneil those -compromise.'- measures over j the head of the Secator from New York and his present associates. We, in those me-i.itire established a greet principle, rebufeim firs dor- trine ot .intervention hv thj Oongre.-s ot the Lui-ted States to prohibit al ivery iu th Territories. H tth pivrties, iii lio2, pledged theni.-elvts to U K1. V ,Ki-rti.l..nir.n flli.l iKlId ctr.1it r.L.I .rm.'t I Cii,c-' t, t(i'-,t pi nil miu I lur.i aiuii'i ' ' T ' ' l.nt to prohibit slavery in the Terri'.ori-s by a-t f Congreec. : The -Whig ""party allirmed that pledge, and so did tlje De mot-racy." . In 18o4 e only carried oat,'.'in the ivinsas ;N iraska jct.-the. 'same principle th it hart been ctlirmed in the compromi.-e rimasure of 18o0. I repeat, thai their resistance to carrying Pnt in good faith the settlement of 1820, .-. their -.defeat of he bill for j -xtnding it to the Pacific ocean, was the sole j c a use of' the agitation ' of 'ldoi), and g4ve rise to j the necessity of -establishing the principle of non- intervutiou by Congress with slavery iu the Ter-ri'ories. . .: . Hence I am noi willine n sit here ami a.low the S-jnat(r from Xew York,. with all (tie weight ' of authority he has with . the powerfuf partyof wnicn ne is tno hao, to arraurn mean-i ina par. ty to which I bnlnmt with thV responsibility for that Agitation which rests solelv UDon him and ... . - r his associates. ' Sir, the Democratic party was willing to carry out the compromise in good fiiib llavinsr been defeated in that for the want of number., and having established the principle of non intervention in the compromise measures of 1850, in iie-i of . it, the Democratic party from that day to this has been faithfil to the new principle of adjustment. Whatever agitation has grown uut oi me queniiou since, nan oeen of-casio ed by the resistance of the party of.whieh that Senator is the head, to this great principle which has been ratified by tho American people t two presidential elections. Ifhe was willing to acquiesce in the solemn and repeated jndge-ment of that American- people to which he appeals, there would be no agitation in this country now. . ' . But, sir, the whole argument of that Senator goes far beyond the qnestion of slavery, even in the Territories. His entire argument rests oh the assumption that the nero and the white man were equal by Diviue law, and hence that all laws and constitutions and governments in violation of thj principle of negro equality are in violation ot the law of God. That is the basis up on wnicn nis spleen rests, tie quotes the Dec laration of Independence to show that the fath ers of the Revolution understood that the negro was placed on an equality with the white man by quoting the claiue, "we bold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Sir, the doctrine of that Senator and of his party is and I have had to .meet it for eight years that the Declaration of Independence intended to recognize the negro and the white man as equal under the Divine law, and hence that all the provisions of the Constitution of tbe. United States which recognizes slavery are in violation -of the Divine law. In other words, it is an afgnment against the Constitution of the United States upon the ground that it i3 contrary to the Jaw of God. -The Senator from NewYoj-k has long held that doctrine. The Senator from New York has often proclaimed to theworld that the Constitntion of the United States was in violation of the Di vine law, and that Senator will not contradict iob aiaiemeni. - i Dave an extraet from one of bis speeches now before me, in which that pro position is distinctly "pnt forth.- In a speech ade ia the State of Ohio, iu 1848,, he said: ... .'TSlaTeryls ths sin of notsomo of the Statesonly, - nt of them all; of not. one " nationality, hut of all nation. It perverted and'.corrupted the moral ssnse of manVia deppty and uotversallv, and thia pervenion. oeaame , universal kabit. llabits of taoagM oeoome nxL prlaeiplea No Americaa 6tat4ias Jet delivered luelf entirely from- these kJbits; We, in' NowOiork, .re ailcy of 'slavery "UUby.'wtUjholdmg the right of anSfrapa rrMn th J. race wo have emancipated, -i'oa, in Ohio, are gall-ty ia the saate way by" system of Alaek laws atill oiore aristoeratio and oaious. ilu wrttUaim tK Constltutloa of the UaJted States that fivs.tlave balleoumt eaual to tro fromens a basis of rer M..nmM.n . .trl It i'rttn laa TV VIOLXTIOV OF DIVIDE LAW. tBat we shall surrender the fu4i tire slave who takes'refuee at our preside from his rlntle pcrsner." ; ' Ibere ton find Usdoctrioe claarlr lata a own ihat the Constitution of the UaUed States is uin ' isolation of the Divine law" and therefore ia , rift 1st h'sirMvd- Yfln M toIf that th nlni relating to fogitive" slaves, being ia violation of w mr-v - i - " tae UiviOiaw, ta not Dinaingon mannna. Tht has teea the doctrine of ihe Senator from Ntr Yor!: for years. I bare nof heard it io the 'Senate to day for the first titsv I hare met in mjownSute, fox iht l&sk ten jears, this tame ipttcal doctrine, lb at th !eclartIoa of Independence recognized the nefrro and the white man as equal; that tb negro and white man are equals by Divine law, and that erery provision "of -oar Constitution Jtnd law which establishes inequali ty between the negro and the white man, u roid became contrary. to the law of God. . The Senator from New York says, id the ery speech from which I have quoted, that new York is yet a slave Slate. - Why? Not that she has a slave within her limits, but because the constitntion of New York does not allow a oefo to vote on an eqaal.ty with white man. Fo that reason he says New York, is still a slave State: for that reason every other State that dis criminates between the negro and the white man is a slave State, leavin? bat a very few States in the Union that are free from his objection. Yet notwithstanding the Senator i committed to to these doctrines, notwithstanding the leading men of his party are committed to them, bear- sues that they have been accused of bein? in fa vor of negro equality, and 8jg the tendency of their doctrine is the equality of the white man. lie introduces the objection, and fails to answer it. He states the proposition and dodges it, to !ave the infwrence that be does not indorse it. Sir, I desire to see these gentlemen : carry ont their principles to their logical conclusion. If they will persist in the declaration that the negro is in de the equal of the white man, and that aiiy inequality is in violation of the Divine law then let them carry it ont in their legislation by conferring on the negroes all the rights of citi zehship the same as on white men. For one, I never held to any Such doctrine. I bold that the Declaration of Independence was only refer ring to the -white man to the governing ra?e of thi3 country, who - were in conflict with Great Britnin, and had no reference to the negro race at all when it declared that all men were created equal. ' - Sir, if the signers of that declaration had understood the instrument then as the Senator from New Yoik now construes it, were they not bound on that day, at that very hour, to emancipate all their slaves? If Mr. Jefferson had meant that his negro slaves were cr?ared by the Almighty his equal, was he not bound to emancipate the slaves on the very day that he 'signed bis name to the Diclaration of IndeDendence! Yet no one ot tne signers ot tnut ne-ciaration emancipa-r ,j i,:.'-i . V' "!"'" AO. one of ite Slates on whose i i r . t j . -i . - - , - Deui'-i lne. aeciaranon. whs signeo, emaDcvpatea ,,s cUves unVl1 R,ter lh Uevolotion was over. rjvery one ot tn original colonies, every one ot the thirtf-en original States, sanctioned and legal-i,e l slavory until after: the Revolution was closed. These . iavts . show' . ''conclusively. 'that . the Dec-laratii.m of Independence was" neverintended to bear the. construction '-plated npon "it by the Senator from New York, and by that enormous tribe of lecturers that go through the country delivering lectures in couutrj-school bouses and base-menH of churches to --abolitionists, in order to j ti-afh the children I hat the Almiuhtr' had put bis oi cumif luiiRuun upon any luequaJity oe-t:ecn t lie white in'n and negro. Mr, IVoaiJeiit, 1 am free to say here what I hayu said over and ovpr Htin at home that, in .my opinion.' this Government was made by tuie men for the beuefit of white men and their pi-i.-;ierity forever;" n'd should be ndia in istered by whife men, anrt ;v non other whatsoever. Mr DOOLI TTLK. I will Seu.iior, then, why not give while wen? ask the honorable the Territories to 5dr. DOUGLAS. Mr.: President, I am in fa- vor.of throwing the Territurifs open to "all the white men. and all the iiejrrivs, too, that choose to gt), and then allow the white men to govern the Territory. I would not let' one of the ne-gnoe. tree or slave, cither' vote or hold office anywhere, whero I had 'thn right, under the Con- f utitution. to prevent U. 1 am in tavor of each Stale ana each, territory ot this buioo taking care of its own negroes, free or slave. If they want slavery, let them have .it;' if they desira to prohibit slavery, let them do it; it is their business, not mine. . ""e in Illinois tried slavery while we were a Territory, and found it was not profitable; and hence we turned philanthropists and .abolished it, just as onr British friends ucross the ocean did. They established slavery in all their colonies, and when they fiund they could not make any more money out of it abolished it. I hold that the question of slaverr is one of political economy, governed by tbe laws of climate, soil, productions, and self-interest, and not by mere statutory provision, I repudi ate the doctrine, that because free institutions may 'be best in one climate, they are, necessarily, the best everywhere; or that because slavery may be indispensable in one locality, therefore it is desirable everywhere. I hold that a wise states man will always adapt his legislation to the wants, interests, condition, and necessities of the people to be governed by it. One people will bear different institutions from another. One climate demands different institutions from another. - I repeat, then, what I have ol'ien had occasion to say, that I do not think uniformity is either possible or desirable. I wish to see no two States precisely alike in their domestic institutions in this Union. Our system rests on the supposition that each State has something in her condition or climate, or her circumstances, requiring laws and institutions diEferent from every other State of the Union. , Hence I answer the question of the Senator from Wisconsin, that I am willing that a Territory settled by white men shall have negroes, free or slave, just as the white men shall determine, but not as the negro shall prescribe. The Seaator from New York has coined a new definition of the States of . the Union. Labor States and Capital States. The capital States, I believe, are the slaveholding States, the labor States are the non-slaveholding States. It has taken that - Senator a good many years to coin that phrase and bring it into use. I hare heard him discuss these favorite theories of his for the last ten years, I think, and I never heard of capital States and labor States before. It strikes me that something has recently occurred up in New England that makes t politic to get up a question Detween capital ana laoor, ana take tho sida of the numbers against the few. We nave seen some accounts in the newspapers of combinations and strikes among the journeymen shoemakers in the towns there, labor gainst capital. The Senator has a "tew word ready coined to suit their case, and make the laborers believe last fie is oa toe side ot tne most num erous class of roters. . " What produced that strike among the jorney men shoemakers?--Why are the mechanics of New England, the laborers aod the employees, now reduced to the sUrration poiaf? Simply because by jour treason, by your sectional agita tion, yon bare created a strife between the iNorth aod the South, bare driven 'way rear southern customers, and thus depnre the laborers ff the means ot sapporr. 1 nis is tbo fruit of yoni lie Sublicao.dogma&v - It is another step, following ohn Browo, of the 'irrepressible ; cooflrcU" Therefote, we now get this new coinage of "la oor Otatea h ia mi thm . aT thm art; lSatar,) Md oapitar be ii agaiost . r " . .TL "" naes. l La.ogbter.1 imrnc inoseaaoaaa,, . wiU understin'ihi. bawaesa. ; They know whr it i. thai they do not getyaan ;ord,r 4s ,tejj dicj ;f montba go. J ! not .coafioed to (tlje shoemakers; it rewiuci wovuihiu snpp ana ererr factory au taa targe . jaoonng..eUblishmBt. rit. .Norttt feel the preanca pTodnced by thedoctrina of taa 'trrepressiDie conflict," This oaw1 coin aga oi words wiil not aara them from tha jnst respousibility that follows the doctrines they hare been inculcating. -If the bad abandoned the doctrine of the "irrepressible conflict," and proclaimed the true doctrine of the Constitution that each State is entirely free to do just as it pleases, hare slavery as lone; as it chooses, and abolish it when It wishes) there would be no conflict; the northern and southern States aroald be brethren; there would be fraternity between'as, and y onr shoemakers would not strike for higher prices. - ' - ' ' ' ' - ' ' - Mr. CLARK. Will the Senator pardon me for interrupting him a moment? Mr. DOUGLAS. I will not gire war for a speech;' I will for a suggestion." ; Mr. CLARK I desire simply to make one ingle suggestion in regard to what the Senator from Illinois said in reference to the condition of the laboring - classes in the factories. I come from a city where there are three thousand opera- tirea, and there never was a time when they were more contented and better paid in the factories than now, and when their easiness was better than at this present lime, r . Mr. DOUGLAS. I was speaking of the scar city of labor growing np In out northern raanu factoring towns, as a legitimate and natural eon-sequence of the diminution of the demand for the manufactured articles; and then the question is, what cause has reduced this demand, except the "irrepressible conflict" that 'has turned the southern trade away from northern cities into Southern towns and soathern cities! Sir, the feeling among the masses of the South we find typified in tbe dress of tbe oenatot from Virginia, Mr, Mason:) they are determined to wear the homespun of their own productions rather than trade with tbe North. That is the feeling which has produced this state of distress in our manu facturing towns. : - :"; ,.;' - The Senator from Ne w York has also referred to the'recent action of the people of Ne w Mexi co, in establishing a code for the protection of property in slaves,, and he. congratulates the country upon the final success of the advocates f free institutions in Kansas, tie could not fail, however, to eay, in order t3 preserve what he thought was a striking, antithesis, that popn- ar sovereignty in Kansas meant State sovereign ty in Missouri. No, sir; popular sovereignty iri Kansas was stricken down by unholy combina tion in New England to ship men to Kansss rowdies and vagabonds with the Bible in one and and Sharp s rifle in the other, to shoot down the friends of self-government. Popular sovereignty in Kansi 8 was Stricken down by the combi ations in tbe northern. States to carryelections nder pretence of emigrant aid societies. In retaliation, Missouri formed aid societies too; and he, following your example, sent men into Kan sas and then occurred tne conflict. iNow, you throw the blame' upon Missouri merely because she followed your example, and attempted to resist its consequences. I 'condemn b th; but I condemn a thousand fold more those that set the example and struck the first blow, than those who thought they would act upon the principle of lighting the devil: with his own weapons, and re sorted to the same means that you hademployed,- . -:-. " -" ".v- - --But, Sir, notwithstanding the efforts of the enigrant ail societies, the people of Kanasas have had their own way, and tbe people ot New Mexico have had. their own way. Kansas has adopted! free State; New Mexico has established a slare Territory, I am content with both. If the people of New Mexico want slavery, let them have i; and I never will rote to repeal thir slave code. If Kansas does not want slavery, I will not help anybody to force it on her. Let each 4o as it pleases. When Kansas comes to tbe conclusion that slavery will suit her, and promote her interest better than the prohibition, let her pass her own slave code; I will not pass it for her. Whenever New Mexico gets tired of her code, she must repeal it for herself; I will not repeal it for her. 'Non intervention by Congress with slavery in" the Territories is the platform on which I stand. Bat I want to know why will not the Senator from New York carry oat his principles to their logical conclusions? Why is there not a man in that whole party, in this body or the Douse of Repreaentatives, ' bold enough to redeem the pledges which that parly has made to the country. I believe you said, in your Philadelphia platform, that Congress had sovereign power over the Ter- itories for their government, and that it was the uty ot Congress to prohibit, in all the territo ries, thoae twin relics of barbarism, slavery and polygamy. Why do you not cany out your pledges? .Why do you not introduce your bill? be Senator from Mew x org says they bare no new measures to originate; no new movement to make; no -new bill to bring forward. Then what confidence shall , the American people repose in jour faith and sincerity, when baring the power in one House, you do not bricg for ward a bill to carry out your principles? The fact is, these principles are arowed to get rotes n the North, bat not to be carried into effect by acts of Congress. You are afraid of hurting your party if you "bring in yonr bill to repeal the slave code of New Mexico; afraid of driving off the conservative men; you think it is wise to wait until after the election, I should be glad to hare confidence enough in the sincerity of the other ide of the Chamber to suppose that they had umcient ccurage to bring forward a law to carry out their principles to their logical conclusions. find nothing of that. 1 bey wish to aitate, to excite the people of the North against the South to get votes for tbe Presidential election; but they shrink from carrying out their measures lest they might throw off some conserratire roters who do not like the Democratic party. But, sir, if the Senator from New York, in the event that he is made President, intends to carry out his principles to their logical conclusions,. let us see where they will lead him. In the same speech that I read from a few minutes ago, find the following. Addressing tne people of Ohio, he said: " You blush not at these things, because they have become as familiar at household words; and jeur pretended Free-Soil alltos claim peculiar merit for maintaining the miscalled guarantees of slavery, whith they find in the national compact. Does not all this prove that tho Whig party have Kept xrp with the spirit of the age ; that it is as true and faithful to human freedom as the Inert conscience of the American people will permit it to he ? What then, you say, can nothing be done for freedom, because the public conscience remains inert 7 Yes, much can be done, everything can he done.; Slavery can be limited to ttt present bounllt. That is the first thing that can be done sla very can be limited to "its present bounds. What else? -' " " ' . ; ' - -' . " can be ameliorated.- It can and must be aholiahedf and you and I can and must do U.n There you God are two propositions; first, sla-' rery was to be limited to the States iowhkh it was then situated, it did not teen exist in any Territory. Slavery was confined to the States. Tbe first proposition was that slarery must be re stricted and conhned to those States. Ihe sec ond was that he, tu Ntw Yorker, and they, the people of Ohio, mast and would abolish it; that is to say aDoiisn it in tne states. ;- j. ney couia abolisbr it o where else.-' Erery appeal they make to northern prejudice - and -paiaion, is against the institution of elarery' everywhere, and tbef would eotoe able to retain their aboli tion allies, the rank and file, unless they held oat the hope that it was the mission of the Re-Dabiicaa partr, if successful, 'to abolish slaverr in the States as well as in the Territories of the Union. . ..jsm.-s-i- .,. t,f. I And again in the tana ipetch, the Senator from New York a& vised the people to disregard con stitntiooal Obligations in these words: i . Bat we mast begiii deeper and lower than the composition and eombmaiio of faetioas or oarties. wherein the strength and reeurtty of slavery lie. You answer taa is iie in toe Lonttitution of the United BUte ana one constitutions and laws of elarebolding Mates. Jo at all. Ik ia la the erro neous sentiment of tfe American people. Coostitu. tions and laws can ne more rise above the rirtoe of the people thaa .tne limpid stream can climb above its Dative spring- IrfeaJcate the love of freedom and the equal right of ma under tie paternal roof to U tna teg are rmvgiu. t ute ecJtoot and in the chHrcket: reform yonr Own code extend a cor welcome to ke fugitive mho lave kie wenm limbe at yonr door, and defend him a you mould vcmr vaternal goae; evrreci yomr w mur, uat emvtiy i a wnetitu txonttl guarantee vraicM may not be reieaeeiL and ovakt . . r i- . 1 .tf . . I know they tell s that all ihia is to bt lone according to the Coastitation j they would not violate the Constitution except so far as the Con stitution violate the law of (Jod that is alj and they are to be the judges of how Urthe",Con stitution does violate the law of God. - TbeV aar that every clause of the Constitution that recog- - : '- - - ? , . . mzes property iu eiavra, is in violation ot the Divine law, and hence should not be obeyed; and with. that interpretation of the Constitution, they turn "to the South ana Say, "We will give you all your righu"junder the Constitution as we explain it!" . f-' " "'" -".- -.-,-.'- Then the Senator devoted ahoat'a third of his speech to a very beautiful homily on tbe glories of our Union. All that he has said, all thit any other man has ever said, all thatj the most eloquent tongne "can ever otter, in behalf of the blessings and the advantages of. this glorious UnioB, I fully endors. But still, sir, I am prepared to say, that the Union is glorioas only when the Constitution is preserved ioviolate. He eulogized the Union. ; I, too, am for the Union ; I indorse the eulogies; but still, what is the Union worth, unless the Constitution is preserved and maintained inviolate, in all its provisions? Sir, I have no faith in the Union-loving senti-timents of those who will pot carry out the Constitution in good faith, as. our fathers made it. Professions of fidelity to the Union will be taken for naught, unless they are accompanied by obedience to the Constitution upon which the Union rests. I have a right to insist that the Constitution shall be maintained inviolate in all its parts, not only that which suits the temper of the North, but every claase of that Constitution, whether you like it or dislike it. Your oath to 8apo:t the Constitution binds you to every line, word, and syllable of the instrument. You have no right to say thatany givea clause is in vio lation of the Divine law, and that, therefore, you will not observe it. The man who disobeys any one clause, on the pretext that it violates the Divine law, or on any other pretext, violates his oath of office. ' - But, sir, what a commentary is this pretext that the Constitution is a riolation of the Divine la w4 upon those revolutionary, fathers whose eulogies we have heard here to day. Did the fram-ers of that instrument make a Constitution in violation of the law of. God? If so, how do yonr consciences allow you to take the oath of office? II the Senator from New York still holds to his declaration that the clar - in the Constitution laliw tn fticritivfi aluviw ia A 1 - r Divine law, how dare w, es-n honeae marrrt an oath to support the instrument? Did he un derstand that be was defying the authority of Heaven when he took the oath to support thst instrument? " : Thus, we see, the radical difference between the Republican party and the Democratic party, is this: we stand by the Constitution as our fathers made it, and by the decisions of the constituted authorities as they are pronounced in obedi-., ence to the Constitution. They repudiate the instrument, substitute their own will for that of the constituted authorities, annul such provisions as theirfanaticism, or prejudice, or policy, may de: Clare to be in violation ofGod's. law, and then say, t'We will protect all your rights under the Constitution as expounded by ourselve.; but not as expounded by the tribunal created for that purpose." Mr, PresiJent, I shall not occupy further time in the discussion of this qui stion to-night. I did not intend to utter a word; and I should not have uttered a word upon the subject, if the Senator from New York had not made a broad arraignment of the Democratic party, and especially of that portion of the action of the party for which I was most immediately responsible. Every body knows that I brought forward and helped to can ry ihrough the Kansas-Nebraska act, and that I was active in support of the compromise meas ares of 1850. I have heard bad faith attached to the Democratic party for that act too long to ne willing to remain silent and seem to sanction it even by tacit acquiescence. Mr. Traraball having replied to Mr. Donglas, he responded as follows: - . I have but a few words to say, in reply to my colleague; and first on the question'whetber Illi nois was a slave Territory or not; and whether we ever had slavery iu the State. I dislike tech nical denial, conveying an idea contrary to the fact. My colleagne well knows, and io do I, that practically, we had slaves there while a Territory, and after we became a' State. I have seen him dance to the music of a negro slave In Illi nois many a time, and I hare danced to the same music myself.: (Laughter.) We have both had the same negro servants to black ear boots and wait upon as, and they wer held as slaves. We know, therefore, that slavery did exist in the State in fact, and slavery did exist in the Terri tory in faet; and his denial relates exclusively to the question whether slarery was legal. Wheth er legal or not, it existed in fact. The master exercised his dominion over the alare, and those negroes were held as shires until 1847, when we established the new constitntion. There are gen tlemen around me here, who know the fact gen tlemen who were nursed by slaves in Illinois. Mo man familiar with the history of Illinois will deny the fact. The quibble is, that the territorial laws authorizing the introduction of slaves were roid because the ordinance of 1787 said slavery was prohibited. : Notwithstanding that ordinance.tbe old French inhabitants, who had slaves before the ordinance, paid no attention to it, and held slaves still. Slaves were held there all the time that Illinois was a Territory; an l after it became a State they were beldHHl they all died out, and their children became emancipated nnder the constitution. It is a fact; we all know it. That gentleman has seen many ot those old French slave, who were held in defiance of the ordinance. Whether they were lawfully held or not, the territorial authorities aslaioed the rights of the master. Not only were slaves held by the French before the ordinance, but the Territorial Legislature' passed a ibw iu luunwnuv vj tuia eueci: any citizen migai ! go to Keatacky, of any other State or Territory, j where slaves were held, and bring slaves into the Territory of Illinois, take them to a county court and in open court enter into an indenture by which the slave and his posterity were to serve bint for binety-nine years; and In the event that the slave -efased to enter into the Indenture, tbe master should have il certain- time In . take Lim out of 4he Territory and eell binw -The Senator now aaya thatlaw'was not valid. Valid or not, It was executed; slaves were introdaced.and they Vere-.nser1j'tbey -wereworkedj and ' they died slaves. Tnat ia tha fct. I bave had handed to tne a ' book show lag the nu mber of slaves in Illinois at the tallcof the varions censuses, by which it appears that; when the censns 'Of -1810 . waa taken, there were ia Illinois 163 tlavei; in 1820, 917; in IS30, 747; and in 1840, 331. Io 1850 there were noDe, for the reason that, in 1847, we adopted a new constitntion that prohibited slavery entirely, and by that time they had nearly all died. . The census shows that atone time there were as many as nine hundred slaves, and at all times the dominion of the master was maintained. ' The fact is, that the people of the Territory f Illinois, when it was a Territory, were almost all from the southern States, particularly from Kentucky and Tennessee.. The southern end of the State was the only part at firat settled that patt called Egypt because it is the land of letters of plenty. Civilization aod learning all originated in Egypt. The northern part of the State, where the political friends of my colleague now preponderate, was thenin"",the possession of the Indians, and so were northern Indiana and north ern Ohio; and a Yankee could not get to Illinois at all, uo less he passed down through Virginia and over into Tennessee and through Kentucky. The consequence was, thatninety-nine oat of a hundred of tbe settlers were from the slave States. Tbey carried the old family servants with them, and kept them. They were told '"Here is an or dinance of Congress passed against your holding them. r i hey said, V hat has.: Congress to do with our domestic institutions; Congress had bet ter mind its own business, and let us alone; we know what we want better than Congrese: and hence they passed tbi3 law to bring them in and make them indentured. Under that, they estab lished slavery and held slaves as long as they wanted them. W hen they assembled to make the constitution of Illinois, in 1818, for admission into the union, nearly every delegate to the con vention brought his regro along with him to black his boots, play the fiddle, wait upon him, and take care of his room. They had a iollr time there; they were dancing people, frolicsome people, people who enjoyed life; they had the old French habits. Slaves were just as thick there as blackberries. But they said . "Experience prores that it is not going to be profitable in this climate." There were no scruples about it. Every one of them was nursed by it. His mother and his father held slaves. They had no scruples about its being right, but tbey said, "We cannot make any money by it and as our State runs way of north up to those eternal snows, perhaps we shall gain population faster if we stop slavery and invite in the northern population;" and, as a matter of political policy, State policy, they prohibited slavery themeelvea. How did they prohibit it? Not by emancipating, setting at liberty, the slaves then in the State, for I believe that has never been done by any legislative body in America, and I doubt whether any one will ever arrogate to itself the right to divest property already there; but thpy provided that all slaves then in the State should remain slaves for life; that all indentured persous should fulfill the terms of their indentures. Ninety-nine years was abou t long enough. I reckon, for grown persons at least. All persons of slave parents, after a certain time, were to beree at a certain age. and all born after a certain other period, trere to b free at their birth. It was a gradual system of emancipation. Ilence, I now repeat, that so long as the ordinance of 187, passed by Congress, said Illinois should not .lave slavery, she did have it; "d the very first day that our people arrived at f that'condition that thefconld do as iheffieuJieT to wit, when they became a State, they adopted a system of gradual emancipation ; but still slarery "continued in the State, as the census of of 1820, the census of 1830, and the census of 1840, show, un'il the new constitution of 1847, when nearly all those old slares had died out, and probably there were not. a half dozf n alive. That was the way slavery was introduced and expired n Illinois; Whatever quibbles there maj be about legal construction, legal right, these are the facts. Look into the territorial legislation, and yon will find as rigorous a code for the protection of slave property as in any State a code prescribing the control of the master, providing that if a negro slave should leave his master's farm with out leave, or in the night time, he should be punished by so many stripes, and if he committed such an offence he should receive so many stripes and so on; as rigorous a code as ever existed in any southern State of this Union, Not only that, but after the Stste came -into the Union, the State of Illinois reenacted that code, and continued it op to the time that slavery died out under the operation of the State constitution. I dislike, sir, to have a controversy with ray colleague about historical facts. I suppose the Senate of the United States has no particular interest in the early history of Illinois, but it has become obligatory on'me to vindicate my statement to that extent. Now, sir. a word about the repeal of the Mis souri Compromise. I have had occasion to refer to that before in the Senate, and I am sorry to have to refer to it again. - My colleague arraigns me av chairman of the Committee on Territories against myself as a. member of the Senate in 1854, upon the Nebraska bill. - He says that, as chairman of the committee, I reported that we did not see proper to depart from the example of 1850 ; that as the Mexican laws were cot then repealed in terms, we did not propose in terms to repeal the Mis. soon restriction, but there the Senator stops, and there theessanse of the report begins but, the report added, this committee propose to carry out the principles embodied in the compromise measures of 1850 in precise language, and then we go on to state what those principles were; and one was, that the people of a Territory should settle the question of slavery -for them-selves, and we report a bill giving them that power. - But in as much as the power to introduce slavery, notwithstanding the Mexican laws,, was conferred on the Territorial Legislatures nnder tbe compromise measures of 1850, the right to introduce it into Kansas, notwithstanding the Mis souri restriction, was also proposed to be confer red without expressly repealing the restriction. The legal effect was precisely the same. Afterwards some gentlemen said they would rather have the legal effect expressed in plain language. I said, "if yon want a repealing act, bare its it does not alter the legal effect." I said so at the time, as the debates show ; and hence I put in the express provision. that .the Missouri act was. thereby repealed. It did not change the legal effect of the bill; but that variation of language has been the staple of a great many stomp speeches, a great many miserable quibbles of county court lawyers, a great many attempts to prove inconsistency by small politicians in the country. " Be it so. The people understand that thine. - The Object I had in view was to allow 1 the people to do as they, pleased. The Erst bill accomplished that; the amendment accomplished it. Whether that was the object of others or not, i) another question. That was my object. The two bills in my opinion bad the same legal effect; but I said if any one doubts it, I will make it plain.' .Some1 said ""we " doubt 1 whether that gtves,the'rlght.' Then I made it plain and brought it in , expresssr terms, and be calls it a change of policy. Ht colleague is welcome to make the most out of that. I bare had that ar-raignmeot orer again.' ' -- The Senator has some doubt" aar to whether I am in good standing in riy own part; whether I am a good' represeutatire" of -northwestern Democracy" I hare nclbin j to aay-aboat IkaL I will allow the people to speak - in -thehf cxnven-tionsoo thai sobject. Whether I 'represent the Democracy of IUirois or not, I aball not say. - The people nnderstand all that. . I can only say that I have been in the Democratic party all my life, and I know what oar Democrats mean. My colleague indorsed and approved the compromise measures of 1850. He was a Democrat a few years ago. 'Even in 185G, be declared, I believe, that he could not vote for me, if nominated, bat he would vote for Mr. .Buchanan; but, after tbe nomination, be did net like tbe platform, and he went over. I have no objection to that; it is all right enough, i Lever intended to taunt him with inconsistency; but I do not think he is as safe and as authoritative en expounder of the Kepublican party as the Senator from New York. The Senator from New York rays that a State that does not allow a negro to vote on an equal, ity with a while man is a slave State. I read his speech here to day. I suppose the Senator from New York is a pretty good Republican. I thought he epoee with some authority for his party. Idid not suppose those neophytes who had just come into the party were going to unset tie and unhorse the leader and embodiment of the party so quickly, and prescribe a platform that would rnle out the Senator from New York. I mast be permitted, therefore, to take the authority of the leaders of the party in -preference to those who are kept in the rank and file until they have served an apprenticeship. (Laughter.) The Senator from N. York says it is slavery not to allow the negro to vote. , Well sir, I hold that that is political slavery. If you disfranchise a man, you make him a political slave. Deprive a white man of a voice in his government, and politically he is a slave. Hence the inequality you create is slavery to that extent. My colleague will not allow a negro to vote. He lives too far south in Illinois for that, decidedly. He has to expound tbe creed down in Egypt. They have other expositions up north. . The creed is pretty black in the north end of the State ; a-bout the centre it is a pretty good mulatto, and it is almost white when you get down into Egypt. It assumes paler shades as you go south. The Democrats of Illinois have one creed, and we can proclaim it everywhere alike. The Senator, my colleague, complains that I represent his party to be in favor of nogro equality. No such thing, says he; I tell my colleague to his teeth it is not so." There is something very fearful in the manner in which he said itl Senators know that he is a dangerous man who eays things to a man's teeth, and I shall be very cautious how I reply. But- te eays he does hold that by the law of God the negro and the white man are created equal; that is, be savs, in a state of nature: and, therefore, he says be indorses that claase of tbe Declaration - of Independence as including the negro as well as the white man. I do not think I mistake my colleagne. He thinks that claase of the Declaration of Independence includes tbe negro as well as the white man. He declares, therefore, that the negro and the white man were created equal. What does that Declaration also eay: "We hold these truths to be self-evident; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." If the negro and the white man are created (jual, and that equality is an tnoZtenaWe right, by what authority is my colleague and his party going to deprive the negro of that inalienable right which be got directly from Godl He says the Republican party is not in favor of aeeavdtag tn4togrartM.aaliensble right that he received directly from his Maker. Oh, no; he tells me to my teeth that they are not io favor of that; tbey will not obey tbe laws of God at all. Their creed i3 to take away inalienable rights. Well I have found that out before, aod that is just the reason I complain of them, that they are for taking away inalienable rights. . If they will cling to the doctrine that the Declaration of Independence conferred certain inalienable rights, among which, we are told, is e-quality between the white man and the negro, they are bound to make tbe human laws they establish conform to those God-given rights which are inalienable. If they believe the first proposition, as honest men,, they are bound to carry the principle to its logical conclusion, and give tbe negro his equality and voice in tbe Government; let him vote at elections, hold ofSce, serve on juries, make him J udge, Governor, ('Senator.') No, they cannot make him" a Senator, because the Supreme Court has decided that he is not a citizen. The Dred Scott decision is in the way. Perhaps that is the reason of. the objection to the Dred Scott decision, that a negro cannot be a Senator. I say, if you hold that the Almighty created the negro the equal of tbe white man, and that equality be an inalienable right you are bound to confer the elective franchise and every other privilege of political equality on the negro. The Senator from New York stands op to it like a man. His logic drove him there, a'jd he bad the honesty to avow the cohseqnence of his own doctrine. That is to say, he -did it before the Harper's Ferrrr raid. He did not say it quite as plainly to-day; for. I will do ihe Senator from New York the justice to say, that in his speech to-day, I think be made the most successful effort, considered as an attempt to conceal what he meant, (Laughter.) He dealt in vague gen eralities; be dealt in disclaimers and general denials; and he covered it all np with a verbiage that would allow anybody to infer just what he pleased, but not to commit the Senator to anything; and to letthe country know that there was no danger from the success of the Republican party; that they did not mean any harm; that if men, believing in the truth of their doctrines, did go and commit invasions, m aiders, robberies, and treason, alt they had to do was to disavow the men who were fools enaugh to believe fbem, and they are not responsible for the consequences of their own action! Now, Mr. President, I wish ray colleague was equally as frink as the Senator from New York. That Senator is in favor of the equality of the negro with the white . man, or else he would not ear that the Almighty guarantied to them an in- auenaoie rignt oi equality,, my coueagae aare not deny the inalienable rights of tbe negro, for if he did, the. Abolitionists would quit him. He dare not avow it, lest the old line Whigs should quit him ; hence he is riding double on this ques tion. 1 nave no desire to conceal my opinions ; and I repeat that I do not believe the negro race is any part oi tne governing element in mis country, except as an element of representation - --i -, .t n in tne manner expressly provioeu in tne vonsiitn- tion. This is a wnite man s government, made b white men for the benefit of white men, to be administered by white men and nobody else j and I should regret tec day that we ever allowed the negroes to hare a hand in its administration. Not that the negro is not entitled to any privile ges at all ; on the contrary, I hold that humani ty requires us to allow the unfortunate negro to enjoy all the rights and privileges that he may seieiy exercise consistent, wud tne gooa oi society. We may, with safety, give them some privileges in Illinois that would not be safe in Mississippi ; because we have but few, while that State has many. We will take care of our negroes, if Mississippi will take care of hers. Each has a right to decide for itself what shall be the relation of the negro to the white man withia .its own Emits, and no ether State has a right to interfere with its determination. . . On that principle there is ni irreprsssroIe eca fiict; there is no eoofiict at alL If we wilt jast take care of oar own negroes, and tniod our own bnsinesa, we shall gel along very well j and we ask oar southern friends to do the same, and tbey seem pretty well disposed to do :U Therefore, I am ia favor of just firing broadside into oar Republican friends over there, who widlkee? interfernij with other people's basinets. That is the complaint I have of them. They kee? holding np the negro for bo te worship, and when they Ret tbe power, they will not give Lin the rights they claim for him ; they will not gire him bis inalienable rights. New York Las set given the .negro those inalienable lights ef suffrage yet. The Senator from New York represents a slave State, according to his own speech; because New York does not allow the negro vote on en equality with a white mi. It is true in New York, they do allow a negro to vote, if he owns 1250 worth of property, bet not without. Tbey suppose $250 joal compensates for the difference between a rich negro and a poor white man. ' Laughter. They allow the rich negro to rote, and do not allow tbe poor one; and the Senator from New York thinks that is a system of slavery. It may be; let New York decide that, it is her business. I do not want to inter? fere with it. Jast let us atone. We do not wans negro suffrage.. We say "non-interference hands off." If yon like the association of the negroes at the polls, that is yonr business; if yoa . . i . i. i , if ' . i . . . come here, give offices to them, if yon choose if you want them for magistrates, that is your business; but yoa mast not send them keref because we do not allow anybody but citizens la bold seats on. this floor; and,-thank God, the Dred Scott case has decided that a negro is no! a citizen. Now, Mr. President, I hope I shall not be com pelled to engage further in the discussion, and I apologize for the fact that I have occupied so mnch time. i . net. - PEOSPEEITY. AND GOLD AHEAD HEW ELDORADO. ,'" Farsuxgtoj?, Mo., March 10th, I860. Fbiexd Harper The good people in and about Fredericktown, Madison County, Mo., are waking np to their interest, and looking out, around, beyond, and a new, bright and encouraging prospect looms in the close and immediate future before them. Gold an immense load of gold, is supposed to cap 'the pine bills around this quiet little town. Copper, lead, co Dalr, platinum, ana otner ncn ana valoaDie mines are being discovered and opened all around the town and vicinity. . The little, usually quiet town is alive with portentous whispers and prey phetic visions of its own future greataeef A new " Birmingham in America,' a second San Francisco and Sacramento, must and will, perhaps, spring np in S.E. Missouri. It is eatd Dr. Koch of St. Louis has been there and selected a perfect cabinet of minerals from the rich mines in the neighborhood. He regards the certainty of gold beyond any possible question of doubt. Professor Weiss, of St. Louis, has been there and returned with a quantity of ore for the purpose cf experimenting, and preparing ' farnaces, to be erected at the mines ss soon as ?tbey can be COnstf acted, and other arrangements matured. The Dr. thinks they can net $350 to $400 per 100 pounds of ore. If this estimate should ultimately prove correct, there is gold enough in that mine to realize a fortune for every man, woman and child ia Missouri. They are also preparing machinery and opening a Coppermine within half a wile of the town. It is supposed to be a very rich vein. The whole country, no doubt, is dotted thickly with the richest deposits on the globe, is aar nnantitr. and of emrr kind. Th wh.-vla country mast ere long be filled with furnaces", manufactories and work -shops, when those God"-given resources shall be developed by indostru n a T a VvV a tet tx r tn iVinVinw mm tm mm uu3 ia uvt tu iu feci iigcukf vuiu avi ug in mn Later and more satisfactory accounts of the gold mines will be found in the following extract from the Arcadia Prospect, in answer to unmerr with platinum, in a species of fjnite or trap, consisting of crystals of hornblende and quarts, in some specimens distinct and well defined, and in others so small and intimately mingled as) to give the rock the appearance of a homoge neous mass. Its color is from dark olive greets to iron black, owing to the predominance of the dark hornblende : and it is very bard, although; it KMinAi hritf?A hw riatinir ftn.t i f finn mM9 . - - j -OJ - . pulverized. In some specimens the particles of precious metals are so finely disseminated as ia be invisible to the naked eye, while in others they may be distinctly seen and appear of a light yellow color, not much resembling that of f oil, and approaching nearest to that of iron pyriteU The gold bearing rock consists of an immense dyke,whicb has been traced for some 6 miles, and appears at a point several miles distant from the locality first opened, to be as rich in precioaS metal as any where else. The width: of the dyke? or rem tae not been ascertained, but it ie known to be over sixty feet, and probably amounts toy several hundred. In depth, it is undoubtedly ia' exhaustible and will probably improve i a richness in going down in it." The first discovery of golJ and platinum was made near tne "ivoar-ing Mountain" in township thirty-two, range six, Madison County. f , " ibe quanuty ot ore is supposed to equal tt masses of iron ore composing the celebrated" Pilot Knob and Iron Mountain. Various sacs- pies of the ore have been subjected to analysis, and been found to contain from one to two as J a half per cent, of alloyed gold and platinum, of the value of at least $15 per ounce : that is, the valoe "of tbe metals in the ore is from f 3,0?3 to $10,000 per ton.' 1 presume the foregoic is in the main true, as a gentleman told me yesterday, be saw the Coa cruahiag mill goinr down on the Iron Mountain Rail Road. It is reported that gold has been found in Green eoonty, ; tt,a St Francois conntr. but these 4B)UA SMey m eJ ej reports need confirmation.--Small quantities of the precious metals, ha this and adjoining conn lij have been fond heretofore. And tradition says that both gold and silver exist ia the spars of the Ozark Moantalns along the St. Franooia. RJrer. No doubt, as the people are aroused and the prospective spirit is up to Us loll tiht, c&tr discoveries wiU ere long be mads. I mast w'-x no ordinary feelings of satisfaction coEratuIatar South East Missouri on the bright procTecU epreadlo out far and wkla before be?, and niy ber resources develep as it alvanees. Do your doty, fellow ciuzens. Gal h3 lef pea you. help yoarlTS, and when yoaaJlbaTS oads a fortune, give tba baUac t. p-vr , . J. S. umtoci